At my wit's end with Nintendo. Any advice?

[deuterio12]

This doesn't make describing voiding a warranty as "illegal" any less absurd.

It's perfectly logical compared to describing custom warrantry-voiding modding to "routine tweaks".

The car may have been an imperfect analogy

Great, then how about address my original point instead of insisting to use analogies even if you admit are wrong in the first place?

And my original point that you quoted was that if you're not paying full price of a product, then you can't expect full quality, simple as that. There's no secret agenda to fill Nintendo's coffers, just admit that the 2nd hand market sells things cheaper for a reason, and that reason is (risk of) lower quality than a product fresh out of the factory. If you go to the 2nd hand market, you're basically gambling and can't complain too much when you lose besides complaining that the dude you were gambling with cheated you.

[Rynjin]

...Do you live in an alternate reality where consumer protection laws don't exist? Buying secondhand isn't as much of a "gamble" as you're imagining. Any reputable place has ways for you to get your money back if a product is defective.

The only reason OP couldn't get his money back is because Gamestop isn't a reputable dealer the product isn't actually defective (so Nintendo won't replace it) and it was past Gamestop's return policy date. Nintendo forced an update that destroyed the product. The product worked perfectly fine (potentially, were it overtly modified, better than fine, since modded units often have quality of life improvements over the base console aside their usual benefits), but the company that initially manufactured it broke it after the fact.

This has absolutely nothing to do with the product being defective, or the secondhand market being the video game equivalent of some disreputable back alley crack deal, this is a matter of a company making a boneheaded move that benefits no one.

[veti]

I'd like to point out that we don't, in fact, know that bricking the console was intentional on Nintendo's part. More likely the mod was simply incompatible with the patch. And since Nintendo didn't produce or approve the mod, it's not reasonable to blame them for not testing their patch against it.

Honestly, as one who's worked in software testing, I sympathise strongly with them on this. Software is complicated. If you update one component, it's a whole lot of trouble to make sure it will work correctly with all the others that it has to. If on top of that you also tried to support everyone who's taken out some of your components and put their own stuff in instead, you'd never get anydamnthing done.

[Rockphed]

I'd like to point out that we don't, in fact, know that bricking the console was intentional on Nintendo's part. More likely the mod was simply incompatible with the patch. And since Nintendo didn't produce or approve the mod, it's not reasonable to blame them for not testing their patch against it.

Honestly, as one who's worked in software testing, I sympathise strongly with them on this. Software is complicated. If you update one component, it's a whole lot of trouble to make sure it will work correctly with all the others that it has to. If on top of that you also tried to support everyone who's taken out some of your components and put their own stuff in instead, you'd never get anydamnthing done.

See, if I were Nintendo, my response to somebody calling in saying that my latest update had bricked their system would probably be to direct them to somewhere where they could re-install the full set of firmware their device requires. If I wanted to make it as hard as possible for people to edit the firmware, I would have firmware be binary that we compile rather than any sort of human readable format. Then I could be as much of a jerk about doing things my way as I want while simultaneously generating good feelings.

Of course, the "how easy is it to get firmware" question is hotly debated among all sorts of device manufacturers. The companies I have worked with required you to create an account with them to download the stuff, but it was generally pretty accessible. I think I used my work email, but it wasn't required. Nintendo has an online store, so they could just distribute these sorts of things behind a wall that requires your store login info.

[The_Jackal]

Fundamentally your problem is that you bought a grey-market device and got screwed. Nintendo isn't the offending party, it was Gamestop, for tinkering with, or otherwise modding, the installed image. The information that Gamestop is an unethical bottom feeder who screws both content providers and their own customers is hardly news.

...Do you live in an alternate reality where consumer protection laws don't exist? Buying secondhand isn't as much of a "gamble" as you're imagining. Any reputable place has ways for you to get your money back if a product is defective.

Sadly, you surrender your consumer rights when you agree to the terms of use in modern computer software.

The only reason OP couldn't get his money back is because Gamestop isn't a reputable dealer the product isn't actually defective (so Nintendo won't replace it) and it was past Gamestop's return policy date. Nintendo forced an update that destroyed the product. The product worked perfectly fine (potentially, were it overtly modified, better than fine, since modded units often have quality of life improvements over the base console aside their usual benefits), but the company that initially manufactured it broke it after the fact.

Again, the terms of use pretty much void your warranty if there are end-user modifications, and since it was acquired used, you can't validate that there aren't any.

This has absolutely nothing to do with the product being defective, or the secondhand market being the video game equivalent of some disreputable back alley crack deal, this is a matter of a company making a boneheaded move that benefits no one.

Gotta disagree here. The whole business model of the console makers is maintaining the exclusivity of their licensed content. Nintendo makes money selling titles, and letting those titles get stolen undercuts the value of their business. In fact, Nintendo is financially responsible for protecting the games they sell against piracy, because otherwise they're in a position where their console sales are bolstered by their own lax security. If I'm a developer letting Nintendo make 30% of retail on the game I wrote for their platform, I am *not* going to be happy that hundreds of thousands of users are playing my game for free because Nintendo can't do their jobs and prevent piracy.

[Rynjin]

Sadly, you surrender your consumer rights when you agree to the terms of use in modern computer software.

If we were talking about downloading a game, sure. This is hardware.

Again, the terms of use pretty much void your warranty if there are end-user modifications, and since it was acquired used, you can't validate that there aren't any.

The warranty is a different matter. Used products generally don't have the warranty anyway. I'm talking return policy.

Gotta disagree here. The whole business model of the console makers is maintaining the exclusivity of their licensed content. Nintendo makes money selling titles, and letting those titles get stolen undercuts the value of their business. In fact, Nintendo is financially responsible for protecting the games they sell against piracy, because otherwise they're in a position where their console sales are bolstered by their own lax security. If I'm a developer letting Nintendo make 30% of retail on the game I wrote for their platform, I am *not* going to be happy that hundreds of thousands of users are playing my game for free because Nintendo can't do their jobs and prevent piracy.

Except none of these updates ever stop piracy. DRM does not stop piracy. Anti-mod updates do not stop piracy. Going by the data you know what the most effective anti-piracy measure is?

Making a good game, and making it easily available.

The most commonly pirated games are usually the ones with DRM, mostly pirated either out of sheer spite, or so people that already bought the game can play it without the performance issues DRM like Denuvo causes (see: Sonic Mania). There's another big subset with region locked games, which then still proceed to sell well if/when publishers deign to release them in a legal to buy format.

It's the same as Nintendo's crusade against emulators recently. Most emulators are used for three reasons: to play games that are hard to find (some games are rare and cost hundreds or thousands to purchase secondhand), to play games that are hard to PLAY (most old consoles run poorly on HDTVs; I own an N64 and Majora's Mask, but emulate it because it's easier to run the game), or to run modded games.

The first two dwindle in popularity when re-releases are common, while the third doesn't affect Nintendo or anyone else' bottom line at all.

[The_Jackal]

If we were talking about downloading a game, sure. This is hardware.

And if you were talking about a hammer, that distinction might mean anything. The 3ds is a modified handheld computer, likely running a fork of Angstrom Linux, if not some custom firmware entirely developed internally by Nintendo. You agree to the EULA when you set up the device, or, likely in this case, the original owner agreed to the EULA when they bought the device, and you have no commercial relationship between yourself and Nintendo.

The warranty is a different matter. Used products generally don't have the warranty anyway. I'm talking return policy.

As you pointed out, you've exceeded Gamestop's return window, so the return policy is irrelevant. Bottom line, you didn't buy the thing from Nintendo, you bought it from Gamestop, and Gamestop didn't buy it from Nintendo either (well, not immediately before they sold it to you. They probably did order it from Nintendo at some point).

Except none of these updates ever stop piracy. DRM does not stop piracy. Anti-mod updates do not stop piracy.

That's like saying, "car thieves can jimmy your car door, so leave the door unlocked when you park".

Going by the data you know what the most effective anti-piracy measure is?
Making a good game, and making it easily available.

Nintendo games are easily available, you just have to pay for them. Oh, what you actually mean is 'Make them cheaper'. Well, businesses go into business to make money, and the investors behind Nintendo expect return on their investment. Games and toys are a very volatile, fad-driven business, and the people investing in them aren't going to simply watch their money drain away just for the mere love of making broke gamers happy.

The most commonly pirated games are usually the ones with DRM, mostly pirated either out of sheer spite, or so people that already bought the game can play it without the performance issues DRM like Denuvo causes (see: Sonic Mania). There's another big subset with region locked games, which then still proceed to sell well if/when publishers deign to release them in a legal to buy format.

I don't know if it's possible to produce accurate statistics on a crime that goes mostly unreported and undetected, so I'm not sure how much weight one can really put on your thesis that somehow locks invite thieves. But it's entirely irrelevant. The people making decisions in these companies are wealthy CEO types. They are not going to come over all kumbaya and start giving their games away.

It's the same as Nintendo's crusade against emulators recently. Most emulators are used for three reasons: to play games that are hard to find (some games are rare and cost hundreds or thousands to purchase secondhand), to play games that are hard to PLAY (most old consoles run poorly on HDTVs; I own an N64 and Majora's Mask, but emulate it because it's easier to run the game), or to run modded games.

Again: Securing their platform is a fundamental duty to Nintendo shareholders and licensors. If they don't do it, they can and will be sued.

The first two dwindle in popularity when re-releases are common, while the third doesn't affect Nintendo or anyone else' bottom line at all.

Somehow, I don't think those niches really trouble Nintendo's bean counters one tiny jot. Given that in the wake of the success of the Switch and Breath of the Wild, Nintendo's riding high on 50% profit margins, so I wouldn't expect them to slack off in protecting their platform and revenue stream, no matter how counterproductive you might argue it to be.

Look, I'm not trying to convince you that the status quo is ideal or just, I don't buy consoles for precisely these reasons (I want to be in control of my hardware). I'm just telling you what the status quo is, and why it leaves Calemyr with no recourse.

[Rynjin]

That's like saying, "car thieves can jimmy your car door, so leave the door unlocked when you park".

It's really not. Locking my car is free and costs me nothing, and prevents casual car thieves or rummagers from messing with my car.

This is like buying a $200 lock every week or so to prevent somebody from snapping a picture of my car. The lock does nothing to stop picture takers and any insinuation as to the contrary is just blowing smoke up customers' asses.

Nintendo games are easily available, you just have to pay for them. Oh, what you actually mean is 'Make them cheaper'. Well, businesses go into business to make money, and the investors behind Nintendo expect return on their investment. Games and toys are a very volatile, fad-driven business, and the people investing in them aren't going to simply watch their money drain away just for the mere love of making broke gamers happy.

The vast majority of most games made before 2000 are unavailable for easy sale, if indeed they exist at all outside of private collections. It's not a matter of making them cheaper, it's a matter of making them EXIST IN A PURCHASABLE FORM. Take half a second to check you know what you're talking about before getting up on your high horse.

People were RABID to buy the NES and SNES Classic systems when they were released...until they also proved to be impossible to get their hands on due to Nintendo intentionally under-manufacturing them to artificially inflate demand. And then people went right back to emulating those games, because it still ended up being the only way to play them unless you wanted to pay some scalper, I **** you not, $15, 000 to get one.

You can get them cheaper on Ebay now, but that still puts no money in Nintendo's hands. If they'd manufactured to meet demand instead of raise it, it would have been pure profit.

Again: If you make it available for sale, people will buy it. Shocking.

I don't know if it's possible to produce accurate statistics on a crime that goes mostly unreported and undetected, so I'm not sure how much weight one can really put on your thesis that somehow locks invite thieves. But it's entirely irrelevant. The people making decisions in these companies are wealthy CEO types. They are not going to come over all kumbaya and start giving their games away.

There have been multiple studies done on this. They are easily searchable on Google. Game piracy does not affect the final sales total of a game, and often boosts it.

That speaks that the majority of cases of piracy (attributed to being something like 50% of all the traffic of the internet worldwide) are not driven by a simple desire to get something for free.

We also have publishers outright admitting that DRM doesn't work, yet they still continue to use it. Again, easily searchable facts.

Again: Securing their platform is a fundamental duty to Nintendo shareholders and licensors. If they don't do it, they can and will be sued.

I'd be interested to see the case files for all those times Nintendo was sued by shareholders for not cracking down on Emulator sites from the year 2000 to today. That's how long Emu Paradise had been running unmolested before now.

Hell, they still haven't been. It was two different sites Nintendo was targeting.

Look, I'm not trying to convince you that the status quo is ideal or just, I don't buy consoles for precisely these reasons (I want to be in control of my hardware). I'm just telling you what the status quo is, and why it leaves Calemyr with no recourse.

Except you're wrong, as earlier in the thread proved. Calemyr had a very simple recourse: he downloaded third party software he otherwise would not have in order to fix the thing Nintendo broke.

The patch had literally the opposite of the intended effect.

[The_Jackal]

It's really not. Locking my car is free and costs me nothing, and prevents casual car thieves or rummagers from messing with my car.

This is like buying a $200 lock every week or so to prevent somebody from snapping a picture of my car. The lock does nothing to stop picture takers and any insinuation as to the contrary is just blowing smoke up customers' asses.

I think you're wildly underestimating the value of the resource that Nintendo is trying to protect. There's billions of dollars of revenue at stake, every year.

The vast majority of most games made before 2000 are unavailable for easy sale, if indeed they exist at all outside of private collections. It's not a matter of making them cheaper, it's a matter of making them EXIST IN A PURCHASABLE FORM. Take half a second to check you know what you're talking about before getting up on your high horse.

It's not my horse. It's Nintendo's.

People were RABID to buy the NES and SNES Classic systems when they were released...until they also proved to be impossible to get their hands on due to Nintendo intentionally under-manufacturing them to artificially inflate demand. And then people went right back to emulating those games, because it still ended up being the only way to play them unless you wanted to pay some scalper, I **** you not, $15, 000 to get one.

Yes, it's almost as if they'd learned from another consumer electronics manufacturer how to manufacture artificial scarcity to ensure healthy demand for their product.

You can get them cheaper on Ebay now, but that still puts no money in Nintendo's hands. If they'd manufactured to meet demand instead of raise it, it would have been pure profit.

I'm sure they will, but the thing about demand is that it's actually wildly difficult to predict. That's why the toy business is so volatile. Market trends and fads are, in fact, very difficult to foresee, and the people who can can become very, very rich (and, for that matter, so can people who can't).

Again: If you make it available for sale, people will buy it. Shocking.

Yeah, that's an assertion that's contingent on 20/20 hindsight, and it fundamentally misunderstands how modern capitalism works, in any case. You think Nintendo's job is to sell things that people want to buy? Wrong. Nintendo's job is to pump up Nintendo's stock price, by posting solid numbers of sales and profit margins. What all the things you are complaining about are aimed at is the latter goal: Protecting Nintendo's profit margins. One thing I can promise you, above all others, is that suddenly chopping the price of their product and dropping DRM from it is that it will not improve Nintendo's profit margins.

There have been multiple studies done on this. They are easily searchable on Google. Game piracy does not affect the final sales total of a game, and often boosts it.

Cite one. And realize that we have an epidemic of bad statistics and science that pollutes the internet with falsehoods. But even if they are true, they aren't going to convince Nintendo's leadership or shareholders. Nobody gets that rich without being greedy; it's too much work.

That speaks that the majority of cases of piracy (attributed to being something like 50% of all the traffic of the internet worldwide) are not driven by a simple desire to get something for free.

I wasn't aware that you could interrogate a web-server to quantify motivation and desire. It's not remotely possible that people answered a survey in a manner which permitted them to rationalize their actions. In fact, it's completely without precedent that the way people answer polls and the way they really act doesn't quite line up.

[QUOTE]We also have publishers outright admitting that DRM doesn't work, yet they still continue to use it. Again, easily searchable facts.

Yeah, and I can show you a video showing a locksmith opening a $150.00 safe in 5 seconds with a big magnet:



You can sell people something that doesn't work if they want what it purports to do bad enough. Why do you think Churches, Economists, and fortune-tellers are able to keep drawing paychecks?

I'd be interested to see the case files for all those times Nintendo was sued by shareholders for not cracking down on Emulator sites from the year 2000 to today. That's how long Emu Paradise had been running unmolested before now.

Hell, they still haven't been. It was two different sites Nintendo was targeting.

Except you're wrong, as earlier in the thread proved. Calemyr had a very simple recourse: he downloaded third party software he otherwise would not have in order to fix the thing Nintendo broke.

The patch had literally the opposite of the intended effect.

Sure, I'm not arguing that. As I said, I'm not advocating for DRM. I'm not advocating against DRM. I'm explaining why, in the context of Nintendo's business, they do things which seem to be hostile to their customers, and why they will continue to do so, in spite of any reasoned argument why they're wasting their time. It's the same reason the recording industry continues to advocate to sue people who pirate music, all the while fostering a scalper ecosystem that bleeds away the lion's share of the money the artists they purport to represent should be earning. Stupid things happen all the time in business, and as long as the business' core financials appear to be healthy, they won't change. That's how private equity capital works: They buy businesses, restructure them with a bunch of debt, flog them back on the market with cashflow that appears better, which then sells for a higher price, to a market which is full of participants who don't understand the long-term prognosis for the business is bad.

[OracleofWuffing]

Yes, it's almost as if they'd learned from another consumer electronics manufacturer how to manufacture artificial scarcity to ensure healthy demand for their product.

Well, spinning off that point, I'd like to return to the nature of how Nintendo's competitors would act in this situation. At one point, Microsoft advised their consumers not to buy used consoles for reasons very similar to the initial topic- that's a relatively old article, but I'm not seeing much to give me reason they don't follow similar policy today. Come to think of it, I believe Windows Genuine Activation is still a thing, and illegitimate Windows copies are probably the closest analog the PC Video Game audience has to the situation at hand. Sony's policy states "Once a PlayStation system has been banned the decision is final and cannot be reversed. This is because bans on PlayStation systems and accounts are responses to the most severe behaviours," though my singular dig through Google doesn't necessarily connect that to mods because it keeps getting connected with some issues with Skyrim and Fallout mods instead of hard/soft mods themselves. Apple is so notorious about not giving jailbreakers the time of day that I'm barely even gonna check their current policy, and Android... Well, that's a lot of retailers to go through and check, but I'm fairly confident most will refuse to repair a device if it is deemed rooted. Those that want a further exercise can also compare and contrast how well those parties make their previous titles playable without third party support.

All that points to Nintendo simply following industry standard. That doesn't mean that the standard is good, and it certainly doesn't mean the standard should remain as-is unchallenged. But it also means that, for the time being, if you play any video games legitimately, you are indirectly supporting this standard- whether it be on a Nintendo platform or most other.

[Rodin]

You can get them cheaper on Ebay now, but that still puts no money in Nintendo's hands. If they'd manufactured to meet demand instead of raise it, it would have been pure profit.

Again: If you make it available for sale, people will buy it. Shocking.

Point of order - they did realize that (even accounting for deliberately under-manufacturing to raise demand) they had massively underestimated the demand for the console and manufactured more of them. I bought mine just a couple months ago, and a quick search on Amazon shows them still in stock.

They made it available, and I bought it.

[Bohandas]

But it also means that, for the time being, if you play any video games legitimately, you are indirectly supporting this standard- whether it be on a Nintendo platform or most other.

And that's definitely not the sort of thing you should be supporting

[Gnoman]

Well, spinning off that point, I'd like to return to the nature of how Nintendo's competitors would act in this situation. At one point, Microsoft advised their consumers not to buy used consoles for reasons very similar to the initial topic- that's a relatively old article, but I'm not seeing much to give me reason they don't follow similar policy today. Come to think of it, I believe Windows Genuine Activation is still a thing, and illegitimate Windows copies are probably the closest analog the PC Video Game audience has to the situation at hand. Sony's policy states "Once a PlayStation system has been banned the decision is final and cannot be reversed. This is because bans on PlayStation systems and accounts are responses to the most severe behaviours," though my singular dig through Google doesn't necessarily connect that to mods because it keeps getting connected with some issues with Skyrim and Fallout mods instead of hard/soft mods themselves. Apple is so notorious about not giving jailbreakers the time of day that I'm barely even gonna check their current policy, and Android... Well, that's a lot of retailers to go through and check, but I'm fairly confident most will refuse to repair a device if it is deemed rooted. Those that want a further exercise can also compare and contrast how well those parties make their previous titles playable without third party support.

All that points to Nintendo simply following industry standard. That doesn't mean that the standard is good, and it certainly doesn't mean the standard should remain as-is unchallenged. But it also means that, for the time being, if you play any video games legitimately, you are indirectly supporting this standard- whether it be on a Nintendo platform or most other.

The difference there is that Microsoft and Sony only ban the console from being used on XboX Live/PSN. They don't brick it remotely.

[Bohandas]

And that's definitely not the sort of thing you should be supporting

I mean this seriously. A lot of people have claimed that this issue illustrates why you shouldn't buy secondhand, but I think it illustrates why you should only buy secondhand. You shouldn't give Nintendo another cent of your money if they treat people like that.

[Keltest]

I mean this seriously. A lot of people have claimed that this issue illustrates why you shouldn't buy secondhand, but I think it illustrates why you should only buy secondhand. You shouldn't give Nintendo another cent of your money if they treat people like that.

You realize, of course, that a completely second hand economy is completely unsustainable?

[The_Jackal]

I mean this seriously. A lot of people have claimed that this issue illustrates why you shouldn't buy secondhand, but I think it illustrates why you should only buy secondhand. You shouldn't give Nintendo another cent of your money if they treat people like that.

They treat hackers like that. Don't mod your system, and you'll be just fine. Look, I sympathize with Calemyr, but he bought a used system which turns out to have been modded. He got screwed. But he didn't get screwed by Nintendo, he got screwed by the people who sold him damaged goods. But expecting Nintendo to just let people hack their platform without repercussions fundamentally misunderstands the nature of the console gaming market. If you can't abide the concept of the platform enforcing its license terms in this manner, then yes, I'd agree with your statement: You shouldn't give Nintendo another cent of your money. Stop buying consoles, buy a PC, and expect to encounter some other form of DRM enforcement.

[veti]

It bears saying again, because clearly it didn't register first time:

There is no reason to believe that Calemyr's story had anything to do with DRM. All we know is that Nintendo's patch was incompatible with firmware that someone else had applied to his system. That shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone who knows anything about software.

The fact that the unauthorised patch's authors had fixed the issue within a few days - suggests that Nintendo wasn't purposely trying to brick anything, because if they were they could have done a much more thorough job.

[deuterio12]

It bears saying again, because clearly it didn't register first time:

There is no reason to believe that Calemyr's story had anything to do with DRM. All we know is that Nintendo's patch was incompatible with firmware that someone else had applied to his system. That shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone who knows anything about software.

The fact that the unauthorised patch's authors had fixed the issue within a few days - suggests that Nintendo wasn't purposely trying to brick anything, because if they were they could have done a much more thorough job.

Indeed, it's not Nintendo's job to make sure their new patches are compatible with whatever hacker mod one machine has.

It's actually impossible. Nintendo can't predict every piece of custom crap a system of dubious origin has, and chances are higher something will go wrong than everything running smoothly.

[Psyren]

*sidesteps argument*

Going after Gamestop is your best bet here. Raise enough of a stink on their customer service line and they will send you a new 3DS, if only to shut you up. It's a trivial expense for them and a win for you.

I wouldn't act any form of tech-savvy at all; play dumb about firmware and warranties and modding and all that jazz. Just pretend you're an angry boomer and your nephew's toy that you CLEARLY bought at the store and CLEARLY have the receipt for that said store REFUSES to honor just stopped working one day on its own. Don't stop until you reach the regional district manager over in corporate.

[deuterio12]

OP's already got the 3DS working again in case you missed it.

[Bohandas]

They treat hackers like that. Don't mod your system, and you'll be just fine. Look, I sympathize with Calemyr, but he bought a used system which turns out to have been modded. He got screwed. But he didn't get screwed by Nintendo, he got screwed by the people who sold him damaged goods. But expecting Nintendo to just let people hack their platform without repercussions fundamentally misunderstands the nature of the console gaming market. If you can't abide the concept of the platform enforcing its license terms in this manner, then yes, I'd agree with your statement: You shouldn't give Nintendo another cent of your money.

So we agree then.

Though it's not just consoles, honestly you shouldn't buy from anyone who enforces their license terms, because it's just going to perpetuate license terms being enforced.

[Psyren]

OP's already got the 3DS working again in case you missed it.

I did miss that, though in my defense, half the thread seems to be arguing about the difference between hardware and software licensing or something.

[Anarion]

So we agree then.

Though it's not just consoles, honestly you shouldn't buy from anyone who enforces their license terms, because it's just going to perpetuate license terms being enforced.

And that's bad? The entire gaming business is built on a shell that, technologically, is close to zero cost to copy things infinitely once somebody has finished making something. You could upend the entire concept of sales entirely, which I guess is possible if 100% of projects are done via kickstarter or similar pre-project financing. But otherwise, people are going to spend a lot of their time, money, and tech effort making it possible to actually sell individual units of the product and prevent people from openly and freely modding their systems because it's the only way to make selling games at all a thing people can do to make a living.

[Bohandas]

And that's bad? The entire gaming business is built on a shell that, technologically, is close to zero cost to copy things infinitely once somebody has finished making something.

Precisely. The only reason this stuff costs anythig is because the price has been artificially inflated to increase revenue. The entire industry is built around price fixing and artificial scarcity.

[Knaight]

Precisely. The only reason this stuff costs anythig is because the price has been artificially inflated to increase revenue. The entire industry is built around price fixing.

Production costs still exist - they're just extremely front loaded, though the current industry patterns of running servers and doing constant patches is adding a lot more maintenance price. It's just the per-unit costs which are near zero.

[Kato]

Precisely. The only reason this stuff costs anythig is because the price has been artificially inflated to increase revenue. The entire industry is built around price fixing and artificial scarcity.

Yes, because people should work for free, right? don't get me wrong, I'm not a saint in some regards, but claiming video games should basically be free or close to it because their digitally distributed or the discs are cheap is an insult to anyone who earns their money making them.
(that is not to say some prices aren't inflated or some games not worth their price, or an unfair share is directed to the wrong channels)

[BeerMug Paladin]

Precisely. The only reason this stuff costs anythig is because the price has been artificially inflated to increase revenue. The entire industry is built around price fixing and artificial scarcity.

Have you ever heard of music?

I go through so few games, that I don't worry about these topics. No matter my decision, what I do will end up not mattering just because I am a marginal consumer.

[Bohandas]

Have you ever heard of music?

Oh yeah, the music industry's even worse. I just didn't want to get into it because it was political and only tangentially related to the topic at hand.

[Kato]

Oh yeah, the music industry's even worse. I just didn't want to get into it because it was political and only tangentially related to the topic at hand.

I'm pretty sure economics are not politics (or religion, unless we go really off script) so please make your case on how to make video games and music for free.

[halfeye]

I'm pretty sure economics are not politics (or religion, unless we go really off script) so please make your case on how to make video games and music for free.

I'm pretty sure all theories of economics are political.